niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
CONTEXT: There are probably a lot of opinions about this. My opinion is that he is. But one thing I am sure of is that there are two clues in the movie. Their inclusion into the movie plot indicate that the creators wanted you to conclude that Little Forrest is in fact Forrest's biological son. When Forrest first finds out about being a father, he asks if he can be with Little Forrest. He goes over to him, sits down, and they both start watching TV. From that point on their actions are identical: They get caught up in the show at the same time, AND they tilt their heads slightly to the left at the same time. Later on, we see that they both love the same things naturally. Little Forrest loves to fish. Once again they get caught up in the sitting "action" of fishing with their heads tilted slightly to the left. Please observe this YouTube clip that shows the father and son tilting their heads to the left. Forrest, the father, goes to his son at around 4:20 minutes; they tilt their heads at around 4:38 minutes. In this YouTube clip, we see at 1:11 minutes that Little Forrest has a knack for ping pong. At 1:18 minutes, both father and son are fishing and again have their heads tilted slightly to the left.  <sep>  Q: Who is Forrest JR? A: father  Q: What happened to Jenny? A: They get caught up in the show at the same time, AND they tilt their heads slightly to the left at the same time  Q: How does it end? A: Later on, we see that they both love the same things naturally  Q: What happened to Forrest? A: Little Forrest loves to fish. Once again they get caught up in the sitting "action" of fishing with their heads tilted slightly to the left  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is the main conflict?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: There are probably a lot of opinions about this. My opinion is that he is. But one thing I am sure of is that there are two clues in the movie. Their inclusion into the movie plot indicate that the creators wanted you to conclude that Little Forrest is in fact Forrest's biological son. When Forrest first finds out about being a father, he asks if he can be with Little Forrest. He goes over to him, sits down, and they both start watching TV. From that point on their actions are identical: They get caught up in the show at the same time, AND they tilt their heads slightly to the left at the same time. Later on, we see that they both love the same things naturally. Little Forrest loves to fish. Once again they get caught up in the sitting "action" of fishing with their heads tilted slightly to the left. Please observe this YouTube clip that shows the father and son tilting their heads to the left. Forrest, the father, goes to his son at around 4:20 minutes; they tilt their heads at around 4:38 minutes. In this YouTube clip, we see at 1:11 minutes that Little Forrest has a knack for ping pong. At 1:18 minutes, both father and son are fishing and again have their heads tilted slightly to the left.  <sep>  Q: Who is Forrest JR? A: father  Q: What happened to Jenny? A: They get caught up in the show at the same time, AND they tilt their heads slightly to the left at the same time  Q: How does it end? A: Later on, we see that they both love the same things naturally  Q: What happened to Forrest? A: Little Forrest loves to fish. Once again they get caught up in the sitting "action" of fishing with their heads tilted slightly to the left  Q: What is the main conflict? A: Their inclusion into the movie plot indicate that the creators wanted you to conclude that Little Forrest is in fact Forrest's biological son  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Are there any new characters?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: There were no proofs of charging Surjan by Rosie. She acted to Surjan like she wanted to help him because she liked him(or maybe she tried to seduce him so that he finally accepts to sleep with her!) and also wanted to finish the bad things happening around the red light area. Rosie spent too much time with him and it is also true that she could get her revenge without helping him. But she wanted not only to kill them but also to show the world what they did to her and why did such accidents occur and they deserved death sentence. At last everybody including Surjan came to know what they did. This is what she wanted. Another point also to be considered that like Frenny told "Dissatisfied souls seek other dissatisfied souls(whether living or dead)". Surjan was in pain, so maybe she thought of helping him as he was in pain due to his sons sudden death. After all till the end of the movie it is evident Surjan started believing in ghosts.  <sep>  Q: In the 2012 movie, Talaash, Did Rosie charge Surjan Singh for the endless talking by the river side he did for a few days?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: There were no proofs of charging Surjan by Rosie. She acted to Surjan like she wanted to help him because she liked him(or maybe she tried to seduce him so that he finally accepts to sleep with her!) and also wanted to finish the bad things happening around the red light area. Rosie spent too much time with him and it is also true that she could get her revenge without helping him. But she wanted not only to kill them but also to show the world what they did to her and why did such accidents occur and they deserved death sentence. At last everybody including Surjan came to know what they did. This is what she wanted. Another point also to be considered that like Frenny told "Dissatisfied souls seek other dissatisfied souls(whether living or dead)". Surjan was in pain, so maybe she thought of helping him as he was in pain due to his sons sudden death. After all till the end of the movie it is evident Surjan started believing in ghosts.  <sep>  Q: In the 2012 movie, Talaash, Did Rosie charge Surjan Singh for the endless talking by the river side he did for a few days? A: There were no proofs of charging Surjan by Rosie  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: also, Syrjan Singh must have been suspicious if she didn;t. After-all she was a 'fancy lady'
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: There were no proofs of charging Surjan by Rosie. She acted to Surjan like she wanted to help him because she liked him(or maybe she tried to seduce him so that he finally accepts to sleep with her!) and also wanted to finish the bad things happening around the red light area. Rosie spent too much time with him and it is also true that she could get her revenge without helping him. But she wanted not only to kill them but also to show the world what they did to her and why did such accidents occur and they deserved death sentence. At last everybody including Surjan came to know what they did. This is what she wanted. Another point also to be considered that like Frenny told "Dissatisfied souls seek other dissatisfied souls(whether living or dead)". Surjan was in pain, so maybe she thought of helping him as he was in pain due to his sons sudden death. After all till the end of the movie it is evident Surjan started believing in ghosts.  <sep>  Q: In the 2012 movie, Talaash, Did Rosie charge Surjan Singh for the endless talking by the river side he did for a few days? A: There were no proofs of charging Surjan by Rosie  Q: also, Syrjan Singh must have been suspicious if she didn;t. After-all she was a 'fancy lady' A: She acted to Surjan like she wanted to help him because she liked him(or maybe she tried to seduce him so that he finally accepts to sleep with her  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why did Rosie spent so much time with Surjan Singh at all?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: There were no proofs of charging Surjan by Rosie. She acted to Surjan like she wanted to help him because she liked him(or maybe she tried to seduce him so that he finally accepts to sleep with her!) and also wanted to finish the bad things happening around the red light area. Rosie spent too much time with him and it is also true that she could get her revenge without helping him. But she wanted not only to kill them but also to show the world what they did to her and why did such accidents occur and they deserved death sentence. At last everybody including Surjan came to know what they did. This is what she wanted. Another point also to be considered that like Frenny told "Dissatisfied souls seek other dissatisfied souls(whether living or dead)". Surjan was in pain, so maybe she thought of helping him as he was in pain due to his sons sudden death. After all till the end of the movie it is evident Surjan started believing in ghosts.  <sep>  Q: In the 2012 movie, Talaash, Did Rosie charge Surjan Singh for the endless talking by the river side he did for a few days? A: There were no proofs of charging Surjan by Rosie  Q: also, Syrjan Singh must have been suspicious if she didn;t. After-all she was a 'fancy lady' A: She acted to Surjan like she wanted to help him because she liked him(or maybe she tried to seduce him so that he finally accepts to sleep with her  Q: Why did Rosie spent so much time with Surjan Singh at all? A: Rosie spent too much time with him and it is also true that she could get her revenge without helping him  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: So she could have got her revenge without doing it right?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: There were no proofs of charging Surjan by Rosie. She acted to Surjan like she wanted to help him because she liked him(or maybe she tried to seduce him so that he finally accepts to sleep with her!) and also wanted to finish the bad things happening around the red light area. Rosie spent too much time with him and it is also true that she could get her revenge without helping him. But she wanted not only to kill them but also to show the world what they did to her and why did such accidents occur and they deserved death sentence. At last everybody including Surjan came to know what they did. This is what she wanted. Another point also to be considered that like Frenny told "Dissatisfied souls seek other dissatisfied souls(whether living or dead)". Surjan was in pain, so maybe she thought of helping him as he was in pain due to his sons sudden death. After all till the end of the movie it is evident Surjan started believing in ghosts.  <sep>  Q: In the 2012 movie, Talaash, Did Rosie charge Surjan Singh for the endless talking by the river side he did for a few days? A: There were no proofs of charging Surjan by Rosie  Q: also, Syrjan Singh must have been suspicious if she didn;t. After-all she was a 'fancy lady' A: She acted to Surjan like she wanted to help him because she liked him(or maybe she tried to seduce him so that he finally accepts to sleep with her  Q: Why did Rosie spent so much time with Surjan Singh at all? A: Rosie spent too much time with him and it is also true that she could get her revenge without helping him  Q: So she could have got her revenge without doing it right? A: she wanted not only to kill them but also to show the world what they did to her and why did such accidents occur and they deserved death sentence  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: That sounds right
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: It is as simple as Ivan is Trevor's guilt, manifested into a human hallucination. He uses Ivan's supposed mysteriousness to start blaming his distractions and his recent obsession over who is out to get him when really Ivan does not exist at all. Fight Club spoilers explain this best: In a way it is like the ending of Fight Club where The Narrator turns out to be Tyler Durden. In the end, the picture that he kept claiming was Ivan, was really him. The picture is taken before his accident and shows how Trevor was before the guilt of killing a child started seeping into him and causing him to lose sleep for a year. Notice that Ivan is finally gone from his life when he finally turns himself in for what he has done and is also able to finally sleep.  <sep>  Q: How come Ivan exists in the Machinist?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: It is as simple as Ivan is Trevor's guilt, manifested into a human hallucination. He uses Ivan's supposed mysteriousness to start blaming his distractions and his recent obsession over who is out to get him when really Ivan does not exist at all. Fight Club spoilers explain this best: In a way it is like the ending of Fight Club where The Narrator turns out to be Tyler Durden. In the end, the picture that he kept claiming was Ivan, was really him. The picture is taken before his accident and shows how Trevor was before the guilt of killing a child started seeping into him and causing him to lose sleep for a year. Notice that Ivan is finally gone from his life when he finally turns himself in for what he has done and is also able to finally sleep.  <sep>  Q: How come Ivan exists in the Machinist? A: It is as simple as Ivan is Trevor's guilt, manifested into a human hallucination  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why is he a part of Trevor's imagination at all?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: It is as simple as Ivan is Trevor's guilt, manifested into a human hallucination. He uses Ivan's supposed mysteriousness to start blaming his distractions and his recent obsession over who is out to get him when really Ivan does not exist at all. Fight Club spoilers explain this best: In a way it is like the ending of Fight Club where The Narrator turns out to be Tyler Durden. In the end, the picture that he kept claiming was Ivan, was really him. The picture is taken before his accident and shows how Trevor was before the guilt of killing a child started seeping into him and causing him to lose sleep for a year. Notice that Ivan is finally gone from his life when he finally turns himself in for what he has done and is also able to finally sleep.  <sep>  Q: How come Ivan exists in the Machinist? A: It is as simple as Ivan is Trevor's guilt, manifested into a human hallucination  Q: Why is he a part of Trevor's imagination at all? A: He uses Ivan's supposed mysteriousness to start blaming his distractions and his recent obsession over  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Are there any clues in the movie that Ivan is a real part of Travor's past?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: It is as simple as Ivan is Trevor's guilt, manifested into a human hallucination. He uses Ivan's supposed mysteriousness to start blaming his distractions and his recent obsession over who is out to get him when really Ivan does not exist at all. Fight Club spoilers explain this best: In a way it is like the ending of Fight Club where The Narrator turns out to be Tyler Durden. In the end, the picture that he kept claiming was Ivan, was really him. The picture is taken before his accident and shows how Trevor was before the guilt of killing a child started seeping into him and causing him to lose sleep for a year. Notice that Ivan is finally gone from his life when he finally turns himself in for what he has done and is also able to finally sleep.  <sep>  Q: How come Ivan exists in the Machinist? A: It is as simple as Ivan is Trevor's guilt, manifested into a human hallucination  Q: Why is he a part of Trevor's imagination at all? A: He uses Ivan's supposed mysteriousness to start blaming his distractions and his recent obsession over  Q: Are there any clues in the movie that Ivan is a real part of Travor's past? A: In the end, the picture that he kept claiming was Ivan, was really him  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Can you tell me more about this picture?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The "Joey room" isn't intended as a permanent residence for Joey. At his own surprised reaction you can already see that there was never a plan to have Joey living with them in their house. That would be a stetch even for Joey's and Chandler's relationship to have him living with Chandler and Monica in their house. Rather than that, the room is likely intended as a guest room dedicated specifically for Joey whenever he visits them and stays at their house. Either that or a kind of "hobby room" for Chandler and Joey to hang out in whenever he visits. The comment is rather tongue-in-cheek to begin with, so it's likely not a room only for Joey. It's a reminiscence to the good times Joey and Chandler had and a reassurance for him that those times, while maybe getting fewer, won't stop just because he got his own house to live in with Monica, a reminder that there will always be someone to play foosball with.  <sep>  Q: Did Joey get to live with Chandler and Monica?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The "Joey room" isn't intended as a permanent residence for Joey. At his own surprised reaction you can already see that there was never a plan to have Joey living with them in their house. That would be a stetch even for Joey's and Chandler's relationship to have him living with Chandler and Monica in their house. Rather than that, the room is likely intended as a guest room dedicated specifically for Joey whenever he visits them and stays at their house. Either that or a kind of "hobby room" for Chandler and Joey to hang out in whenever he visits. The comment is rather tongue-in-cheek to begin with, so it's likely not a room only for Joey. It's a reminiscence to the good times Joey and Chandler had and a reassurance for him that those times, while maybe getting fewer, won't stop just because he got his own house to live in with Monica, a reminder that there will always be someone to play foosball with.  <sep>  Q: Did Joey get to live with Chandler and Monica? A: The "Joey room" isn't intended as a permanent residence for Joey  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How long did he stay there?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The "Joey room" isn't intended as a permanent residence for Joey. At his own surprised reaction you can already see that there was never a plan to have Joey living with them in their house. That would be a stetch even for Joey's and Chandler's relationship to have him living with Chandler and Monica in their house. Rather than that, the room is likely intended as a guest room dedicated specifically for Joey whenever he visits them and stays at their house. Either that or a kind of "hobby room" for Chandler and Joey to hang out in whenever he visits. The comment is rather tongue-in-cheek to begin with, so it's likely not a room only for Joey. It's a reminiscence to the good times Joey and Chandler had and a reassurance for him that those times, while maybe getting fewer, won't stop just because he got his own house to live in with Monica, a reminder that there will always be someone to play foosball with.  <sep>  Q: Did Joey get to live with Chandler and Monica? A: The "Joey room" isn't intended as a permanent residence for Joey  Q: How long did he stay there? A: At his own surprised reaction you can already see that there was never a plan to have Joey living with them in their house  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How did Joey feel about this?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: The "Joey room" isn't intended as a permanent residence for Joey. At his own surprised reaction you can already see that there was never a plan to have Joey living with them in their house. That would be a stetch even for Joey's and Chandler's relationship to have him living with Chandler and Monica in their house. Rather than that, the room is likely intended as a guest room dedicated specifically for Joey whenever he visits them and stays at their house. Either that or a kind of "hobby room" for Chandler and Joey to hang out in whenever he visits. The comment is rather tongue-in-cheek to begin with, so it's likely not a room only for Joey. It's a reminiscence to the good times Joey and Chandler had and a reassurance for him that those times, while maybe getting fewer, won't stop just because he got his own house to live in with Monica, a reminder that there will always be someone to play foosball with.  <sep>  Q: Did Joey get to live with Chandler and Monica? A: The "Joey room" isn't intended as a permanent residence for Joey  Q: How long did he stay there? A: At his own surprised reaction you can already see that there was never a plan to have Joey living with them in their house  Q: How did Joey feel about this? A: It's a reminiscence to the good times Joey and Chandler had and a reassurance for him that those times, while maybe getting fewer, won't stop just because he got his own house to live in with Monica  Q: Did Joey resent Monica? A: That would be a stetch even for Joey's and Chandler's relationship to have him living with Chandler and Monica in their house  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Did it make Monica uncomfortable for Joey to find out that it wasn't forever?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself. However, she tells him that the only reason she married him was that she was pregnant with Albert who is really Edmond's son. So, he heads to the ruined estate to take the supposed treasure but that turns out not be be real either. So, the woman he wants doesn't love him, his son is not his and the treasure turned out to be illusory and he's wanted for murder. After firing a shot and wounding Mercedes he rides away but realises that he has nothing left to live for except killing Edmond. He tries..and fails.  <sep>  Q: Why did Fernand stop escaping after he shot Mercedes?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself. However, she tells him that the only reason she married him was that she was pregnant with Albert who is really Edmond's son. So, he heads to the ruined estate to take the supposed treasure but that turns out not be be real either. So, the woman he wants doesn't love him, his son is not his and the treasure turned out to be illusory and he's wanted for murder. After firing a shot and wounding Mercedes he rides away but realises that he has nothing left to live for except killing Edmond. He tries..and fails.  <sep>  Q: Why did Fernand stop escaping after he shot Mercedes? A: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: But why did he stop himself from escaping when he could have got away?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself. However, she tells him that the only reason she married him was that she was pregnant with Albert who is really Edmond's son. So, he heads to the ruined estate to take the supposed treasure but that turns out not be be real either. So, the woman he wants doesn't love him, his son is not his and the treasure turned out to be illusory and he's wanted for murder. After firing a shot and wounding Mercedes he rides away but realises that he has nothing left to live for except killing Edmond. He tries..and fails.  <sep>  Q: Why did Fernand stop escaping after he shot Mercedes? A: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself  Q: But why did he stop himself from escaping when he could have got away? A: After firing a shot and wounding Mercedes he rides away but realises that he has nothing left to live for except killing Edmond  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why did he want to kill Edmond?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself. However, she tells him that the only reason she married him was that she was pregnant with Albert who is really Edmond's son. So, he heads to the ruined estate to take the supposed treasure but that turns out not be be real either. So, the woman he wants doesn't love him, his son is not his and the treasure turned out to be illusory and he's wanted for murder. After firing a shot and wounding Mercedes he rides away but realises that he has nothing left to live for except killing Edmond. He tries..and fails.  <sep>  Q: Why did Fernand stop escaping after he shot Mercedes? A: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself  Q: But why did he stop himself from escaping when he could have got away? A: After firing a shot and wounding Mercedes he rides away but realises that he has nothing left to live for except killing Edmond  Q: Why did he want to kill Edmond? A: she tells him that the only reason she married him was that she was pregnant with Albert who is really Edmond's son  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Can you tell me anything else about the storyline?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself. However, she tells him that the only reason she married him was that she was pregnant with Albert who is really Edmond's son. So, he heads to the ruined estate to take the supposed treasure but that turns out not be be real either. So, the woman he wants doesn't love him, his son is not his and the treasure turned out to be illusory and he's wanted for murder. After firing a shot and wounding Mercedes he rides away but realises that he has nothing left to live for except killing Edmond. He tries..and fails.  <sep>  Q: Why did Fernand stop escaping after he shot Mercedes? A: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself  Q: But why did he stop himself from escaping when he could have got away? A: After firing a shot and wounding Mercedes he rides away but realises that he has nothing left to live for except killing Edmond  Q: Why did he want to kill Edmond? A: she tells him that the only reason she married him was that she was pregnant with Albert who is really Edmond's son  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How did Edmond react to this news?
Output: No
CONTEXT: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself. However, she tells him that the only reason she married him was that she was pregnant with Albert who is really Edmond's son. So, he heads to the ruined estate to take the supposed treasure but that turns out not be be real either. So, the woman he wants doesn't love him, his son is not his and the treasure turned out to be illusory and he's wanted for murder. After firing a shot and wounding Mercedes he rides away but realises that he has nothing left to live for except killing Edmond. He tries..and fails.  <sep>  Q: Why did Fernand stop escaping after he shot Mercedes? A: Fernand wanted Mercedes for himself  Q: But why did he stop himself from escaping when he could have got away? A: After firing a shot and wounding Mercedes he rides away but realises that he has nothing left to live for except killing Edmond  Q: Why did he want to kill Edmond? A: she tells him that the only reason she married him was that she was pregnant with Albert who is really Edmond's son  Q: Can you tell me anything else about the storyline? A: he heads to the ruined estate to take the supposed treasure but that turns out not be be real either  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is the treasure that he heads to the ruined castle for?
Output: No
CONTEXT: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers; I don't believe anyone killed by a wight will resurrect themselves automatically. Beyond that, I don't think we know all of the details about how that process works, what's required, etc. The only time, as far as I can remember, that we've seen it at work is the huge battle near the end of Season 5, where the Night King personally raised an army of dead wildlings as wights. It's also pretty clear that the characters in-universe don't understand it either. The Night's Watch is hyper-aware of the possibility of their dead coming back to life. They have burned the corpses of dead Night's Watchmen before. In fact, I believe in the Saason 6 trailer we've seen them trying to burn Jon's body as well, despite there being little chance of a Walker getting near it.  <sep>  Q: Requirements to join the Wights (The Army of the Dead)
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers; I don't believe anyone killed by a wight will resurrect themselves automatically. Beyond that, I don't think we know all of the details about how that process works, what's required, etc. The only time, as far as I can remember, that we've seen it at work is the huge battle near the end of Season 5, where the Night King personally raised an army of dead wildlings as wights. It's also pretty clear that the characters in-universe don't understand it either. The Night's Watch is hyper-aware of the possibility of their dead coming back to life. They have burned the corpses of dead Night's Watchmen before. In fact, I believe in the Saason 6 trailer we've seen them trying to burn Jon's body as well, despite there being little chance of a Walker getting near it.  <sep>  Q: Requirements to join the Wights (The Army of the Dead) A: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is the process?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers; I don't believe anyone killed by a wight will resurrect themselves automatically. Beyond that, I don't think we know all of the details about how that process works, what's required, etc. The only time, as far as I can remember, that we've seen it at work is the huge battle near the end of Season 5, where the Night King personally raised an army of dead wildlings as wights. It's also pretty clear that the characters in-universe don't understand it either. The Night's Watch is hyper-aware of the possibility of their dead coming back to life. They have burned the corpses of dead Night's Watchmen before. In fact, I believe in the Saason 6 trailer we've seen them trying to burn Jon's body as well, despite there being little chance of a Walker getting near it.  <sep>  Q: Requirements to join the Wights (The Army of the Dead) A: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers  Q: What is the process? A: Beyond that, I don't think we know all of the details about how that process works, what's required, etc  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Do you have any examples?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers; I don't believe anyone killed by a wight will resurrect themselves automatically. Beyond that, I don't think we know all of the details about how that process works, what's required, etc. The only time, as far as I can remember, that we've seen it at work is the huge battle near the end of Season 5, where the Night King personally raised an army of dead wildlings as wights. It's also pretty clear that the characters in-universe don't understand it either. The Night's Watch is hyper-aware of the possibility of their dead coming back to life. They have burned the corpses of dead Night's Watchmen before. In fact, I believe in the Saason 6 trailer we've seen them trying to burn Jon's body as well, despite there being little chance of a Walker getting near it.  <sep>  Q: Requirements to join the Wights (The Army of the Dead) A: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers  Q: What is the process? A: Beyond that, I don't think we know all of the details about how that process works, what's required, etc  Q: Do you have any examples? A: The only time, as far as I can remember, that we've seen it at work is the huge battle near the end of Season 5  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What show is this?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers; I don't believe anyone killed by a wight will resurrect themselves automatically. Beyond that, I don't think we know all of the details about how that process works, what's required, etc. The only time, as far as I can remember, that we've seen it at work is the huge battle near the end of Season 5, where the Night King personally raised an army of dead wildlings as wights. It's also pretty clear that the characters in-universe don't understand it either. The Night's Watch is hyper-aware of the possibility of their dead coming back to life. They have burned the corpses of dead Night's Watchmen before. In fact, I believe in the Saason 6 trailer we've seen them trying to burn Jon's body as well, despite there being little chance of a Walker getting near it.  <sep>  Q: Requirements to join the Wights (The Army of the Dead) A: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers  Q: What is the process? A: Beyond that, I don't think we know all of the details about how that process works, what's required, etc  Q: Do you have any examples? A: The only time, as far as I can remember, that we've seen it at work is the huge battle near the end of Season 5  Q: What show is this? A: The Night's Watch  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is the plot of the show?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers; I don't believe anyone killed by a wight will resurrect themselves automatically. Beyond that, I don't think we know all of the details about how that process works, what's required, etc. The only time, as far as I can remember, that we've seen it at work is the huge battle near the end of Season 5, where the Night King personally raised an army of dead wildlings as wights. It's also pretty clear that the characters in-universe don't understand it either. The Night's Watch is hyper-aware of the possibility of their dead coming back to life. They have burned the corpses of dead Night's Watchmen before. In fact, I believe in the Saason 6 trailer we've seen them trying to burn Jon's body as well, despite there being little chance of a Walker getting near it.  <sep>  Q: Requirements to join the Wights (The Army of the Dead) A: I believe that being raised as a wight requires active work on the part of the Walkers  Q: What is the process? A: Beyond that, I don't think we know all of the details about how that process works, what's required, etc  Q: Do you have any examples? A: The only time, as far as I can remember, that we've seen it at work is the huge battle near the end of Season 5  Q: What show is this? A: The Night's Watch  Q: What is the plot of the show? A: They have burned the corpses of dead Night's Watchmen before  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why did they burn his body?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I have a friend who owns a (very) small theater... so some of this probably isn't "official" (I know they bend the rules a bit at times). Also, they operate only on film, I'm not for sure about digital Anyway, one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels. The movie theater then tapes together these reels into usually 1 or 2 big reels(depending on what's capable of the projector and the size of the movie). During this time, they add on small preview reels. From what I can tell, usually 2 or 3 previews are shipped with a particular movie. It's not mandatory that theaters put them on, but they are usually the latest, so it gives theaters a good incentive. Unlike movie reels which must be returned, preview reels can be kept by the movie theater. So the movie theater can of course add on more previews if they wish as well. I believe it's allowed for them to add no previews on as well. Of course, with digital there is much less choice. I believe the previews with digital movies are completely fixed.. So, it's completely up to the studios.. As for how they select which previews are shipped with blockbuster movies, see the other answers  <sep>  Q: What factors go into determining what trailers are played before movies?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I have a friend who owns a (very) small theater... so some of this probably isn't "official" (I know they bend the rules a bit at times). Also, they operate only on film, I'm not for sure about digital Anyway, one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels. The movie theater then tapes together these reels into usually 1 or 2 big reels(depending on what's capable of the projector and the size of the movie). During this time, they add on small preview reels. From what I can tell, usually 2 or 3 previews are shipped with a particular movie. It's not mandatory that theaters put them on, but they are usually the latest, so it gives theaters a good incentive. Unlike movie reels which must be returned, preview reels can be kept by the movie theater. So the movie theater can of course add on more previews if they wish as well. I believe it's allowed for them to add no previews on as well. Of course, with digital there is much less choice. I believe the previews with digital movies are completely fixed.. So, it's completely up to the studios.. As for how they select which previews are shipped with blockbuster movies, see the other answers  <sep>  Q: What factors go into determining what trailers are played before movies? A: one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What do the 6 or so small reels have to do with trailers?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I have a friend who owns a (very) small theater... so some of this probably isn't "official" (I know they bend the rules a bit at times). Also, they operate only on film, I'm not for sure about digital Anyway, one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels. The movie theater then tapes together these reels into usually 1 or 2 big reels(depending on what's capable of the projector and the size of the movie). During this time, they add on small preview reels. From what I can tell, usually 2 or 3 previews are shipped with a particular movie. It's not mandatory that theaters put them on, but they are usually the latest, so it gives theaters a good incentive. Unlike movie reels which must be returned, preview reels can be kept by the movie theater. So the movie theater can of course add on more previews if they wish as well. I believe it's allowed for them to add no previews on as well. Of course, with digital there is much less choice. I believe the previews with digital movies are completely fixed.. So, it's completely up to the studios.. As for how they select which previews are shipped with blockbuster movies, see the other answers  <sep>  Q: What factors go into determining what trailers are played before movies? A: one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels  Q: What do the 6 or so small reels have to do with trailers? A: The movie theater then tapes together these reels into usually 1 or 2 big reels(depending on what's capable of the projector and the size of the movie  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What happens after the reels are taped together?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I have a friend who owns a (very) small theater... so some of this probably isn't "official" (I know they bend the rules a bit at times). Also, they operate only on film, I'm not for sure about digital Anyway, one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels. The movie theater then tapes together these reels into usually 1 or 2 big reels(depending on what's capable of the projector and the size of the movie). During this time, they add on small preview reels. From what I can tell, usually 2 or 3 previews are shipped with a particular movie. It's not mandatory that theaters put them on, but they are usually the latest, so it gives theaters a good incentive. Unlike movie reels which must be returned, preview reels can be kept by the movie theater. So the movie theater can of course add on more previews if they wish as well. I believe it's allowed for them to add no previews on as well. Of course, with digital there is much less choice. I believe the previews with digital movies are completely fixed.. So, it's completely up to the studios.. As for how they select which previews are shipped with blockbuster movies, see the other answers  <sep>  Q: What factors go into determining what trailers are played before movies? A: one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels  Q: What do the 6 or so small reels have to do with trailers? A: The movie theater then tapes together these reels into usually 1 or 2 big reels(depending on what's capable of the projector and the size of the movie  Q: What happens after the reels are taped together? A: During this time, they add on small preview reels  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is this always the way trailers are added?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I have a friend who owns a (very) small theater... so some of this probably isn't "official" (I know they bend the rules a bit at times). Also, they operate only on film, I'm not for sure about digital Anyway, one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels. The movie theater then tapes together these reels into usually 1 or 2 big reels(depending on what's capable of the projector and the size of the movie). During this time, they add on small preview reels. From what I can tell, usually 2 or 3 previews are shipped with a particular movie. It's not mandatory that theaters put them on, but they are usually the latest, so it gives theaters a good incentive. Unlike movie reels which must be returned, preview reels can be kept by the movie theater. So the movie theater can of course add on more previews if they wish as well. I believe it's allowed for them to add no previews on as well. Of course, with digital there is much less choice. I believe the previews with digital movies are completely fixed.. So, it's completely up to the studios.. As for how they select which previews are shipped with blockbuster movies, see the other answers  <sep>  Q: What factors go into determining what trailers are played before movies? A: one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels  Q: What do the 6 or so small reels have to do with trailers? A: The movie theater then tapes together these reels into usually 1 or 2 big reels(depending on what's capable of the projector and the size of the movie  Q: What happens after the reels are taped together? A: During this time, they add on small preview reels  Q: Is this always the way trailers are added? A: the movie theater can of course add on more previews if they wish as well. I believe it's allowed for them to add no previews on as well  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Can you tell me anything else about trailers and how they are selected?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I have a friend who owns a (very) small theater... so some of this probably isn't "official" (I know they bend the rules a bit at times). Also, they operate only on film, I'm not for sure about digital Anyway, one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels. The movie theater then tapes together these reels into usually 1 or 2 big reels(depending on what's capable of the projector and the size of the movie). During this time, they add on small preview reels. From what I can tell, usually 2 or 3 previews are shipped with a particular movie. It's not mandatory that theaters put them on, but they are usually the latest, so it gives theaters a good incentive. Unlike movie reels which must be returned, preview reels can be kept by the movie theater. So the movie theater can of course add on more previews if they wish as well. I believe it's allowed for them to add no previews on as well. Of course, with digital there is much less choice. I believe the previews with digital movies are completely fixed.. So, it's completely up to the studios.. As for how they select which previews are shipped with blockbuster movies, see the other answers  <sep>  Q: What factors go into determining what trailers are played before movies? A: one thing a lot of people don't realize is that film is usually shipped on 6 or so small reels  Q: What do the 6 or so small reels have to do with trailers? A: The movie theater then tapes together these reels into usually 1 or 2 big reels(depending on what's capable of the projector and the size of the movie  Q: What happens after the reels are taped together? A: During this time, they add on small preview reels  Q: Is this always the way trailers are added? A: the movie theater can of course add on more previews if they wish as well. I believe it's allowed for them to add no previews on as well  Q: Can you tell me anything else about trailers and how they are selected? A: with digital there is much less choice. I believe the previews with digital movies are completely fixed.. So, it's completely up to the studios  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Do the studios have a say in what previews or trailers are shown?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: As in the English language, names used to describe a person or a group of persons have mutated into their last name, similar to those whose last name is a profession. In Colombia, the last name Lucumi is frequently found in case of persons born in the Pacific Coast of the country, and so far it hasn't spread much around the country. If you find a Lucumi in Colombia, he most certainly will be from that part of the country. So, being used to be called Lucumi during their slavery, and being proud of that, after slavery ended and got the right to have a last name like the rest of the citizens, they pick one they could relate to.  <sep>  Q: Explanation of "Lucumi"?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: As in the English language, names used to describe a person or a group of persons have mutated into their last name, similar to those whose last name is a profession. In Colombia, the last name Lucumi is frequently found in case of persons born in the Pacific Coast of the country, and so far it hasn't spread much around the country. If you find a Lucumi in Colombia, he most certainly will be from that part of the country. So, being used to be called Lucumi during their slavery, and being proud of that, after slavery ended and got the right to have a last name like the rest of the citizens, they pick one they could relate to.  <sep>  Q: Explanation of "Lucumi"? A: In Colombia, the last name Lucumi is frequently found in case of persons born in the Pacific Coast of the country  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Any other explanations?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: As in the English language, names used to describe a person or a group of persons have mutated into their last name, similar to those whose last name is a profession. In Colombia, the last name Lucumi is frequently found in case of persons born in the Pacific Coast of the country, and so far it hasn't spread much around the country. If you find a Lucumi in Colombia, he most certainly will be from that part of the country. So, being used to be called Lucumi during their slavery, and being proud of that, after slavery ended and got the right to have a last name like the rest of the citizens, they pick one they could relate to.  <sep>  Q: Explanation of "Lucumi"? A: In Colombia, the last name Lucumi is frequently found in case of persons born in the Pacific Coast of the country  Q: Any other explanations? A: being used to be called Lucumi during their slavery, and being proud of that, after slavery ended and got the right to have a last name like the rest of the citizens  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Where do Lucimi people live?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: As in the English language, names used to describe a person or a group of persons have mutated into their last name, similar to those whose last name is a profession. In Colombia, the last name Lucumi is frequently found in case of persons born in the Pacific Coast of the country, and so far it hasn't spread much around the country. If you find a Lucumi in Colombia, he most certainly will be from that part of the country. So, being used to be called Lucumi during their slavery, and being proud of that, after slavery ended and got the right to have a last name like the rest of the citizens, they pick one they could relate to.  <sep>  Q: Explanation of "Lucumi"? A: In Colombia, the last name Lucumi is frequently found in case of persons born in the Pacific Coast of the country  Q: Any other explanations? A: being used to be called Lucumi during their slavery, and being proud of that, after slavery ended and got the right to have a last name like the rest of the citizens  Q: Where do Lucimi people live? A: the last name Lucumi is frequently found in case of persons born in the Pacific Coast of the country  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Anything else you can tell me about Lucumi?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: As in the English language, names used to describe a person or a group of persons have mutated into their last name, similar to those whose last name is a profession. In Colombia, the last name Lucumi is frequently found in case of persons born in the Pacific Coast of the country, and so far it hasn't spread much around the country. If you find a Lucumi in Colombia, he most certainly will be from that part of the country. So, being used to be called Lucumi during their slavery, and being proud of that, after slavery ended and got the right to have a last name like the rest of the citizens, they pick one they could relate to.  <sep>  Q: Explanation of "Lucumi"? A: In Colombia, the last name Lucumi is frequently found in case of persons born in the Pacific Coast of the country  Q: Any other explanations? A: being used to be called Lucumi during their slavery, and being proud of that, after slavery ended and got the right to have a last name like the rest of the citizens  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: what is Pena associated with?
Output: No